ACQUISITION 

WORKFORCE 

Federal Agencies 

Obtain Training to 

Meet Requirements, 

but Have Limited 

Insight into Costs and 

Benefits of Training 

Investment 

Report to Congressional Requesters

March 2013 

GAO-13-231 

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO 
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-13-231, a report to 

congressional requesters

March 2013

ACQUISITION WORKFORCE 

Federal Agencies Obtain Training to Meet 

Requirements, but Have Limited Insight into Costs and 

Benefits of Training Investment

Why GAO Did This Study

The acquisition workforce manages

and oversees billions of dollars in 

acquisition programs and contracts to 

help federal agencies get what they 

need, at the right time, and at a 

reasonable price; therefore, it is 

important that agencies provide 

adequate training to this workforce. In 

this review, GAO identified (1) the role 

of OFPP and the FAI in assisting 

agencies in meeting certification 

requirements; (2) agencies’ 

approaches to providing training; and 

(3) the extent to which agencies collect 

information on the costs and benefits 

of their acquisition training. To 

determine OFPP and the FAI roles, 

GAO analyzed relevant legislation. 

GAO obtained information from 23 

federal agencies on their training 

approaches through a questionnaire, 

and selected 4 agencies—the 

Departments of Education and the 

Treasury, DHS, and VA—to provide

illustrative examples. GAO used its 

questionnaire and a subsequent data 

call to obtain information on how 

agencies collect information on the 

costs and benefits of their training. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that OFPP help 

ensure that agencies collect and report 

comparable cost data and assess the 

benefits of acquisition training by (1) 

providing further guidance on the cost 

data agencies are to report annually, 

and (2) requiring agencies to analyze 

course evaluations, at a minimum, to 

help assess the benefits of training 

investments. OFPP concurred with the 

recommendations and indicated it has 

started to take actions to provide 

additional guidance.

 

What GAO Found

The Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) sets standards and policies for 

the federal acquisition workforce, and has established certification requirements, 

including minimal training, for the three main acquisition roles—contracting staff, 

Contracting Officer’s Representatives, and Program/Project Managers—to 

promote the development of government-wide core acquisition competencies

and facilitate mobility across agencies. DOD follows separate certification 

standards. The Federal Acquisition Institute (FAI), which is responsible for 

fostering and promoting the training and development of the acquisition 

workforce, works closely with OFPP and has initiatives underway to improve the 

collection and management of training information, including cost data and 

course evaluations; streamline communication of acquisition training guidance; 

and coordinate efforts to leverage acquisition workforce training resources

throughout the government. 

To support efforts for the acquisition workforce to attain and maintain federal 

certification requirements, most agencies (17 of 23) provide the majority of their 

acquisition training using external sources—vendors, FAI, the Defense 

Acquisition University, or other agencies. The Departments of Homeland Security

(DHS), the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs (VA) operate their own permanent 

centers with dedicated resources that train the agency’s acquisition workforce. 

Education reported using a different approach to providing acquisition training—it 

gets most of its training from other government entities. Federal agencies face 

similar challenges in providing training to their acquisition workforce. The top 

challenges reported by agencies in obtaining training for their acquisition 

workforce involved having sufficient resources. Twenty of 23 agencies identified

obtaining adequate funding and 19 of 23 identified obtaining sufficient staff to

manage training as challenging. In addition, almost half of the agencies reported 

that the fundamental step of identifying the acquisition workforce is a challenge

especially when members of the workforce are involved in acquisitions as a 

secondary and not primary duty. 

The training cost data that agencies collect is not comparable and agencies have 

limited information on the benefits of their acquisition workforce training 

investments. Although almost all agencies provided some cost data in response 

to GAO’s questionnaire and subsequent data call, the agencies’ cost data did not

allow for government-wide assessment of their training investment. To date, 

FAI’s efforts to collect training cost data has also met with limited success. Cost 

data collected in 2012 by GAO and FAI included different cost components—

such as facilities, travel, and instructors—which do not allow for government-wide 

analysis. Having comparable training cost data are important to inform FAI efforts 

to establish government-wide contracts for training. As for determining benefits of 

training, 7 of 23 federal agencies reported having no metrics, not even basic endof-course evaluations. Without basic data, agencies do not have insight into the

benefits of their acquisition workforce training efforts.

View GAO-13-231. For more information, 

contact Belva M. Martin at (202) 512-4841 or 

martinb@gao.gov.
Page i GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

Letter 1 

Background 3

OFPP and FAI Provide Policy, Guidance, and Assistance to Help 

Improve Government-wide Training Efforts 6

Agencies Generally Use External Sources for Acquisition Training 

and Face Similar Workforce Training Challenges 11

Lack of Comparable Cost Data and Limited Insights On Benefits of 

Training Hinder Efforts to Maximize Resources Governmentwide 20

Conclusions 23

Recommendations for Executive Action 24

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 25

Appendix I Summary of Agencies’ Response to GAO Questionnaire 

on Civilian Acquisition Workforce Training 28

Appendix II Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 43

Appendix III GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgements 49

Tables

Table 1: Key Agency Officials Involved in Managing Acquisition 

Workforce Training 5

Table 2: OFPP’s Legislative Responsibilities Related to Acquisition 

Workforce Training 7

Table 3: Percentage of Acquisition Workforce with Federal 

Acquisition Certifications by Category—Fiscal Year 2011 16

Table 4: Interagency Councils Involved in Oversight and 

Management of Acquisition Workforce Training 45

Table 5: Leading Training Investment Practices Agencies Should 

Implement 47

Contents 
Page ii GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

Figures

Figure 1: Agency-reported Sources Used for Acquisition Workforce 

Training in Fiscal Year 2011 13

Figure 2: Number of Agencies That Reported Training Source 

Selections Factors 15

Figure 3: Challenges Reported By Agencies in Obtaining 

Acquisition-Specific Training Resources 17

Figure 4: Challenges Reported by Agencies in Staff Attending 

Training 20

Abbreviations

ACMIS Acquisition Career Management Information 

System

AHCP Acquisition Human Capital Plan

CAO Chief Acquisition Officer

COR Contracting Officer’s Representative

DAU Defense Acquisition University

DHS Department of Homeland Security

DOD Department of Defense

FAC Federal Acquisition Certification

FAI Federal Acquisition Institute

FAITAS FAI Training Application System

OFPP Office of Federal Procurement Policy

P/PM Program/Project Manager

VA Department of Veterans Affairs
Page iii GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548

March 28, 2013

Congressional Requesters

Constrained budgets and the need to address gaps in critical federal 

workforce skills point to the need for federal agencies to ensure their 

training and development programs are effective, in order to provide 

personnel with the skills essential to fulfilling their agencies’ missions. The 

shortage of trained acquisition personnel hinders agencies from 

managing and overseeing acquisition programs and contracts that have 

become more expensive and increasingly complex. As a result, the 

federal government is at risk for significant overcharges and wasteful 

spending of the billions of dollars it spends for goods and services each 

year. For fiscal year 2011, 23 Chief Financial Officers Act agencies had 

about 83,000 federal employees who managed and oversaw over $160 

billion in acquisitions.1 The Office of Management and Budget’s Office of 

Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP), the Federal Acquisition Institute 

(FAI), and the executive agencies play important roles in helping to 

ensure that acquisition workforce professionals meet federal training 

standards and that training dollars are used effectively. 

The acquisition workforce plays a key role in managing programs and 

overseeing contracts to help agencies get what they need, at the right 

time, and at a reasonable price. Accordingly, you asked us to evaluate 

approaches of federal agencies, other than the Department of Defense 

(DOD), to train the acquisition workforce. We reviewed the efforts of 23 

federal agencies to provide training to the acquisition workforce, as well 

as the efforts of OFPP and FAI to support this training throughout the 

government. Specifically, this report addresses the (1) role of OFPP and 

FAI in promoting Federal Acquisition Certification standards and assisting 

agencies in meeting acquisition workforce training requirements, (2) 

approaches agencies use to provide training to their acquisition 

 

1

The 23 civilian Chief Financial Officer Act agencies we included are the Departments of 

Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland 

Security, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, Justice, Labor, State, 

Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Environmental Protection Agency; 

General Services Administration; National Aeronautics and Space Administration; Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission; National Science Foundation; Office of Personnel Management; 

Small Business Administration; Social Security Administration; and the U.S. Agency for 

International Development. 31 U.S.C. § 901.

 
 

Page 2 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

workforces, and (3) the extent to which agencies collect information on 

the costs and benefits of their acquisition training. You were also 

interested in the grants workforce, which we will report on separately.

To identify the roles of OFPP and FAI in promoting Federal Acquisition 

Certification standards, we analyzed legislation on their authority and 

relevant guidance they provided to agencies, and interviewed their 

officials. To provide government-wide information on federal agencies’ 

approaches to providing acquisition workforce training, we administered a 

questionnaire to 23 agencies from July to August 2012 to obtain data 

about their current acquisition-specific training approaches, including the 

sources used for courses (in particular whether courses were provided by 

the agency itself or by external sources, such as a commercial sector 

vendor, FAI, the Defense Acquisition University (DAU) or another 

agency), facilities, budgetary and staffing resources, methods of training, 

and challenges faced in providing acquisition training.2 We received 

questionnaire responses from all 23 agencies, although not every agency 

responded to every question. One agency provided responses from its 

headquarters procurement office and three bureaus. We consolidated the 

information from the four surveys to ensure the tabulations eliminated 

duplicative counting of the agency and to provide averaged data, as 

appropriate. A summary of the agencies’ responses to each question is 

provided in appendix I. To determine the information agencies gather on 

the costs and benefits of their training approaches, we supplemented the 

questionnaire responses by soliciting cost and metrics data from the 

agencies using a data collection instrument from October to November 

2012. We also reviewed the agencies’ most recent Acquisition Human 

Capital Plans (AHCP), dated March 2012. 

To provide further insight into agencies’ training approaches and tracking 

of cost and effectiveness data, we selected the Departments of Education 

(Education), Homeland Security (DHS), the Treasury (Treasury), and

 

2

The Department of Defense is excluded from this review because we have previously 

reported on its acquisition workforce training and its follows separate acquisition workforce 

certification standards specified in the Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act, 

Pub. L. No. 101-510, § 1202(a) (1990) (codified as amended at 10 U.S.C. §§ 1701-1764 

(2013)). See GAO, Defense Acquisition Workforce: Better Identification, Development, 

and Oversight Needed for Personnel Involved in Acquiring Services, GAO-11-892

(Washington, D.C.: Sept. 28, 2011) and Defense Acquisition Workforce: DOD’s Training 

Program Demonstrates Many Attributes of Effectiveness, but Improvement Is Needed, 

GAO-11-22 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 28, 2010).
 

Page 3 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

Veterans Affairs (VA) to provide illustrative examples. DHS, Treasury, 

and VA are agencies that operate dedicated acquisition workforce training 

facilities—permanent centers with dedicated resources that provide 

training specifically for the agency’s acquisition workforce. Education is a 

smaller agency that has no dedicated training facility for its acquisition 

workforce. We also discussed the extent to which these agencies were 

aware of and had applied leading training investment practices reported 

in our prior work, which the Office of Personnel Management and experts 

had agreed should be implemented by agencies to support effective 

training investment decisions.3 Of the eight leading practices GAO 

identified, we focused on four dealing primarily with determining the costs 

and effectiveness of training: (1) identifying the appropriate level of 

investment to provide for training and development efforts and prioritizing 

funding so that the most important training needs are addressed first; (2) 

having criteria for determining whether to design training and 

development programs in-house or obtain these services from a 

contractor or other external source; (3) tracking the cost and delivery of 

training and development programs agency-wide; and (4) evaluating the 

benefits achieved through training and development programs, including 

improvements in individual and agency performance. Further details of 

our objectives, scope, and methodology are provided in appendix II.

We conducted this performance audit from February 2012 to March 2013, 

in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.

The Office of Personnel Management, as the federal government’s 

human capital manager, provides leadership and guidance on 

establishing and operating efficient federal training and development 

programs throughout the government. It provides advice and assistance 

to agencies on training and development programs so that those 

programs support strategic human capital investment.

 

3

GAO, Federal Training Investments: Office of Personnel Management and Agencies Can 

Do More to Ensure Cost-Effective Decisions, GAO-12-878 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 17,

2012).

Background 
 

Page 4 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

OFPP has specific responsibilities related to acquisition workforce training 

to help ensure that the skills needed to handle the complexities of 

acquisition programs and contracts are maintained. The Office of Federal 

Procurement Policy Act requires executive agencies and the OFPP 

Administrator to establish management policies and procedures for the 

effective management of the acquisition workforce—including education, 

training, and career development.4 In 2005, OFPP defined the civilian 

acquisition workforce to include, at a minimum, professionals serving in 

the contracting series (GS-1102), Contracting Officers, Purchasing series 

(GS-1105), Program/Project Managers (P/PM), and Contracting Officer’s

Representatives (COR) or the equivalent, and additional positions 

identified by the agency.5 Participation in the acquisition workforce may 

be on a full-time, part-time, or occasional basis. 

OFPP, working through FAI, is also required to foster and promote the 

development of government-wide training standards and certifications for 

the acquisition workforce and to perform a range of activities supporting 

management of this workforce.6 FAI’s activities are funded through the 

Acquisition Workforce Training Fund, which is financed by deposits in an 

amount equal to 5 percent of the dollar amount of acquisitions made by 

civilian agencies under the Federal Supply Schedules and 

Governmentwide Acquisition Contracts.7 FAI, under the guidance of its 

 

4

41 U.S.C. § 1703.

5

Office of Management and Budget, Policy Letter 05-01, April 2005.

6

41 U.S.C. § 1703(c)(2).

7

The Federal Supply Schedules program consists of contracts awarded by the General 

Services Administration or the Department of Veterans Affairs for similar or comparable 

goods or services, established with more than one supplier, at varying prices. Federal 

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) § 8.401 and § 8.402. The Schedules offer a large group of 

commercial products and services ranging from office supplies to information technology 

services. Governmentwide Acquisition Contracts (GWAC) are considered multi-agency 

contracts but, unlike other multi-agency contracts, are not subject to the same 

requirements and limitations, such as documentation that the contract is in the best 

interest of the government as set forth under the Economy Act. GWACs are contracts for 

information technology established by one agency for government-wide use that are 

operated—(1) by an executive agent designated by the Office of Management and Budget 

pursuant to 40 U.S.C. § 11302(e); or (2) under a delegation of procurement authority 

issued by the General Services Administration (GSA). FAR § 2.101. The Clinger-Cohen 

Act of 1996 authorized GWACs to be used to buy information technology goods and 

services. Pub. L. No. 101-510, § 1202 (1996), (codified at 40 U.S.C. § 11314(a)(2)). All 

agencies can order goods and services directly through the Schedules contracts and 

GWACs.
 

Page 5 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

Board of Directors, works closely with OFPP as well as the DAU to 

collaborate on many issues involved with training and developing the

federal acquisition workforce. The Defense Acquisition Workforce 

Improvement Act required the Secretary of Defense to establish and 

maintain DAU in order to provide training for the DOD acquisition 

workforce.8 FAI differs notably from DAU, however, in that it shares much 

of the responsibility for training the civilian acquisition workforce with the 

agencies and has fewer budgetary and staffing resources. For example, 

FAI currently has 12 staff, while DAU has over 700 faculty and staff.

The Administrator of OFPP is also required to ensure that agencies 

collect and maintain standardized information on the acquisition 

workforce. Agencies, in consultation with OFPP, can structure their 

management and oversight of training for their acquisition workforce in 

such a manner as best supports the agency. Key agency positions 

involved in managing the acquisition workforce within the agencies are 

described in table 1.

Table 1: Key Agency Officials Involved in Managing Acquisition Workforce Training

Position Acquisition training-related responsibilities

Chief Acquisition Officer (CAO) Responsible for developing and maintaining an agency acquisition career 

management program to ensure an adequate professional acquisition workforce. 

Participates in the strategic planning and performance evaluation process to develop 

strategies and specific plans for training to rectify deficiencies in the skills and 

abilities of the acquisition workforce. Responsible, in consultation with the Acquisition 

Career Manager, for reporting acquisition workforce data to the Human Capital Office 

for the agency’s human capital plan.

Senior Procurement Executive Responsible for providing management direction of an agency’s procurement 

system. In some agencies, CAOs oversee or assume this role to help ensure 

implementation of agency acquisition workforce policy. Responsible for identifying 

training and development needs of the acquisition workforce. 

Acquisition Career Manager Leads an agency’s acquisition career management program and ensures that its 

acquisition workforce meets the skills and capabilities required in OMB, OFPP, and 

agency policies. 

Source: GAO summary of relevant sections of title 41 of the U.S. Code and OMB Policy Letter 05-01, Developing and Managing the 

Acquisition Workforce.

Agencies have several methods to choose from when providing training 

courses for their acquisition workforce. In general, acquisition workforce 

training is categorized by: (1) agency or agency-sponsored training 

 

8

10 U.S.C. § 1746. 
 

Page 6 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

provided by the agency, which may be taught using in-house staff or 

contractor employees; (2) government entity training provided by another 

federal agency, FAI, or the DAU; and (3) vendor training provided by a 

commercial sector company, which is generally available to multiple 

agencies at the same time. For the purposes of this report we refer to 

government entity and vendor training as external sources.

OFPP sets standards and policies for the training and development of the 

federal acquisition workforce. Its efforts include strengthening workforce 

planning requirements and setting standards for core acquisition training 

by establishing certification requirements. FAI conducts activities that 

support and assist civilian agencies in training and development of their 

acquisition workforces. FAI efforts include: improving the collection and 

management of training information, including cost data and course 

evaluations; streamlining the communication of acquisition training 

guidance; and coordinating efforts to maximize acquisition workforce 

training investments government-wide.

In carrying out its responsibilities, OFPP’s activities have focused on 

improving the training and development of the acquisition workforce 

across the government. To promote the development of core acquisition 

competencies throughout the government and facilitate employee mobility 

across civilian agencies, OFPP, in 2005, required the development of 

Federal Acquisition Certification (FAC) requirements for acquisition 

professionals serving as contracting staff (including Contracting Officers), 

CORs, and P/PMs. The certification programs require a minimum set of 

career-specific courses, along with education and experience 

requirements, to obtain certification, and continuous learning 

requirements to ensure professionals remain current on acquisition 

policies and practices.9 In addition, since fiscal year 2010, OFPP has 

required agencies to complete an annual AHCP as part of their annual 

budget planning process to elevate acquisition workforce planning from a 

short-term activity to provide input into the agency’s strategic plan to a 

continued effort to guide the overall growth and development of the 

acquisition workforce. OFPP officials stated that they use the data 

 

9

The Federal Acquisition Certification requirements were issued in 2005 for contracting 

professionals and 2007 for Contracting Officer’s Representatives and Program/Project 

Managers.

OFPP and FAI 

Provide Policy, 

Guidance, and 

Assistance to Help 

Improve 

Government-wide 

Training Efforts 

OFPP Promotes 

Government-wide 

Practices for Acquisition 

Workforce Training and 

Development
 

Page 7 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

provided in the agencies’ plans to develop a government-wide snapshot 

of the acquisition workforce and to identify practices for sharing 

throughout the government. Table 2 provides an overview of OFPP’s 

legislative responsibilities related to acquisition workforce training.

Table 2: OFPP’s Legislative Responsibilities Related to Acquisition Workforce Training

• Issuing policies to promote uniform implementation by executive agencies of their acquisition workforce policies and procedures

• Recommending to the Administrator of General Services Administration that sufficient budget resources and authority go to FAI 

so it can support government-wide training standards and certification requirements to enhance the mobility and career 

opportunities of the federal acquisition workforce

• Acting through FAI, providing and updating government-wide training standards and certification requirements

• Establishing a Board of Directors to provide oversight of FAI and its efforts to support the acquisition workforce

• Acting through FAI, coordinating with the Office of Personnel Management on human capital efforts

Source: GAO summary of federal law.

FAI’s mission is to foster and promote the development of a professional 

acquisition workforce government-wide. However, FAI was not 

established, nor does it have the budgetary or staffing resources, to meet 

the acquisition workforce training needs of the entire civilian acquisition 

workforce, according to FAI officials. FAI’s activities during the last few 

years are aimed at improving the collection of training information to 

better inform government-wide oversight, streamlining the communication 

of acquisition guidance and updates on initiatives, and coordinating 

efforts to maximize acquisition workforce training investments throughout 

the government. Since FAI’s initiatives are in various stages of 

implementation, we did not evaluate their effectiveness; however, in 

several instances, we note our initial observations of these efforts. The 

main efforts and initiatives FAI is pursuing to fulfill its training-related 

legislative responsibilities include:

• Fostering and promoting the development of a professional 

acquisition workforce throughout the government10

According to officials, FAI develops and provides courses, through 

commercial vendors, that support the FAC program requirements. It is 

coordinating with DAU to determine if existing defense acquisition 

course materials can be modified for training the civilian acquisition 

 

1041 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(1).

FAI Activities Help 

Agencies Monitor and 

Train the Acquisition 

Workforce 
 

Page 8 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

workforce. FAI reported that while its spending plan for fiscal year 

2012 could provide $3 million for courses, training requests submitted 

by the agencies totaled in excess of $18 million.

FAI is working with a number of vendors who provide acquisition 

workforce training to establish government contracts that would 

provide uniform costs for standardized training courses needed for the 

FAC programs. FAI plans to have contracts in place in 2013 that 

would be available for agencies to use to provide fiscal year 2014 

training.

• Assisting federal agencies with their acquisition human capital 

planning efforts11

FAI offers guidance and direction on human capital planning through 

its instructions for agencies’ annual AHCP submissions. Beginning in 

2010, OFPP has required agencies to submit an annual AHCP each 

March that provides the agency’s strategies and goals for increasing 

both the capacity and capability of the acquisition workforce. To assist 

the agencies in preparing each submission, FAI provides them with a 

report template that includes specific topics to be included. We 

observed that the fiscal year 2012 AHCP submissions provided 

information on the agencies’ goals for strengthening the acquisition 

workforce, including certification goals, and planned training initiatives 

for the current and future fiscal years. 

FAI has an effort underway to develop an inventory of acquisition 

courses to identify duplicate courses provided by the agencies using 

the AHCP submissions. The guidance for the fiscal year 2012 AHCP 

included a request to complete a template with data, including cost, 

on each course provided or being developed by the agencies. For the 

fiscal year 2013 AHCP submissions, which are due March 2013, FAI 

officials distributed the report templates to coincide with the budget 

cycle to help agencies inform their budget process.

• Collecting and analyzing acquisition workforce data from the 

Office of Personnel Management, heads of executive agencies, 

and individual employees12 

 

1141 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(11).

1241 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(3).
 

Page 9 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

FAI recently upgraded the government-wide acquisition career 

information management system it maintains for all agencies. In 

2011, FAI replaced the Acquisition Career Management Information 

System (ACMIS) with the FAI Training Application System (FAITAS), 

which allows registration for courses, tracking of individuals’ training 

records, and other information management tools. For example, 

agencies can now manage the certification approval process, track an 

individual’s continuous learning progress, and search for courses 

offered by FAI and other agencies that use FAITAS to enroll 

participants in their courses. FAI reports that five agencies currently 

use the FAITAS registration function to alert other agencies to unfilled 

seats within a specific agency’s training course. Additional features of 

the system include a course scheduling module; a business 

intelligence tool for agencies to identify training locations and course 

availability; and a communication tool for broader outreach to the 

acquisition workforce. For example, an OFPP official explained that 

FAITAS can be used to send e-mail updates on OFPP policy, 

guidance, or other OFPP or FAI initiatives to all individuals registered 

in the system. 

FAI conducts periodic surveys of agencies to collect data about the 

acquisition workforce for OFPP. For example, FAI conducts the biannual Acquisition Workforce Competency Survey to collect 

information on agency acquisition workforces’ skills and abilities and 

to identify competency gaps within and across agencies. FAI officials 

explained that the survey results provide a government-wide view of 

which courses are in demand that informs their efforts to achieve 

economies of scale when providing training.

FAI reports an annual count of the acquisition workforce as it has 

done for more than the past decade; however, its count has been 

limited to professionals serving in four job series—General Business 

and Industry (GS-1101), Contracting (GS-1102), Purchasing (GS1105), and Procurement Clerical and Assistance (GS-1106). FAI 

began gathering data on CORs and P/PMs as part of the acquisition 

workforce count in fiscal year 2007. In its recent report on the 

acquisition workforce count, FAI reported that 33,271 personnel were 

employed in the acquisition workforce’s four main job series in fiscal 

year 2010, and an additional 47,959 and 4,186 personnel were 

identified as CORs and P/PMs, respectively, by the agencies in their 

AHCPs—which represents about 85,000 individuals in the civilian 

acquisition workforce for fiscal year 2010. FAI does not directly collect 

data for the workforce count, and has acknowledged that agencies 

have some problems identifying CORs and P/PMs but the data have 

been improving.
 

Page 10 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

• Facilitating interagency intern and training programs, as 

requested by agencies13 

According to officials, FAI also conducts outreach and leverages 

training courses government-wide. In 2012, FAI met with officials from 

each agency to discuss training efforts and locate training spaces that 

could be used by FAI and others when supplying courses through 

vendors. FAI officials reported that these agency visits provided 

insights regarding how the agencies’ training programs varied in terms 

of their organization and resources and identified duplicative training 

efforts.

In addition, FAI provides opportunities to share information across the 

acquisition workforce community. FAI began providing webinars on 

current acquisition issues in fiscal year 2012, and launched a 

newsletter for the acquisition workforce community in December 

2012. According to officials, the newsletter will provide more in-depth 

information on policy changes, human capital initiatives, and tools and 

technology enhancements.

FAI hosts, coordinates, and participates in roundtables at the 

Interagency Acquisition Career Management Committee meetings to 

foster discussion among agencies and share information on their 

training or educational challenges and needs. According to FAI 

officials, these meetings provide opportunities to share leading 

practices, identify challenges, and discuss potential initiatives. Recent 

discussion topics included plans to hold a competency-based 

certification workshop, roll out of additional FAITAS workforce 

management tools, and results of FAI’s bi-annual Acquisition 

Workforce Competency Survey.

In July 2012, FAI established the Federal Acquisition Council on 

Training to help share information on agencies’ training efforts and 

standardize acquisition training throughout the government. According 

to FAI officials, the council’s goal is to help ensure no acquisition 

workforce training seat, whether offered by FAI or another agency, 

goes unfilled. Agencies are asked to open up unfilled training seats to 

other agencies whenever available, and to use FAITAS as the official 

course registration system to communicate available training seats 

and enroll participants for courses to reduce overhead and 

administrative costs for agencies.

 

1341 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(9).
 

Page 11 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

• Periodically analyzing acquisition career fields and evaluating 

the effectiveness of training and career development programs 

for acquisition personnel14

According to officials, FAI has efforts underway to standardize the 

end-of-course participant evaluations administered by the vendors 

who provide FAI-sponsored courses. According to FAI officials, 

course participants will not receive their course completion 

certifications until they complete the course evaluation. Currently FAI 

does not analyze course evaluations administered by the vendors; 

however, officials commented that the use of standardized 

evaluations could enable them to work with vendors to improve the 

consistency of the information provided in training courses. A pilot is 

underway using standard evaluations for FAI courses taught by 

vendors being provided to one agency, and FAI plans to extend the 

pilot to other agencies early in 2013.

Most agencies approach acquisition workforce training through classroom 

courses taught by external sources—vendors, FAI, DAU, or other 

agencies. While all agencies have meeting spaces for training, three 

operate permanent centers with dedicated resources that train the 

agency’s acquisition workforce. The agencies’ current training focus is to 

provide courses through which their acquisition workforces may attain or 

maintain their FAC certifications. Agencies reported facing several 

challenges in providing acquisition-related training. The areas reported as 

being the most challenging are related to staffing and budgetary 

resources. Some agencies also reported challenges with the identification 

of their acquisition workforce, which is a fundamental step needed for 

managing the workforce and its training. Agencies also reported that 

additional assistance from OFPP and FAI would help their acquisition 

workforce training efforts. In addition, the agencies reported that their 

acquisition workforces are challenged in finding time in their workload to 

attend training. For more details on the approaches, budgetary and 

staffing resources, and other challenges faced by the agencies, see 

appendix I for a summary of the 23 agencies’ responses to the 

questionnaire we administered.

 

1441 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(4) and 41 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(7).

Agencies Generally 

Use External Sources 

for Acquisition 

Training and Face 

Similar Workforce 

Training Challenges 
 

Page 12 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

Agencies provide acquisition workforce training predominantly through 

external sources—government entities or vendors. In fact, 17 agencies 

reported that the majority of their acquisition workforce training comes 

from having their workforce attend training provided by external sources 

rather than from their agency. The other government entities may provide

training to an agency without seeking additional reimbursement, as is the 

case with FAI, DAU, and some federal agencies; however, others, such 

as the VA, charge a fee to attend their training to recoup their costs.15 Of 

the remaining 6 agencies, 5 reported that they hold agency-sponsored 

courses to provide the majority, if not all, of their acquisition workforce 

training, and one agency did not report. Some agencies use contractor 

personnel to instruct a portion of their agency-sponsored training. Figure 

1 illustrates the sources of training that agencies reported using to 

provide training to their acquisition workforce in fiscal year 2011.

 

15Although FAI does not seek reimbursement for individual classes, civilian agencies “pay” 

for the courses since they provide the funding for FAI’s operations through the mandatory 

fee paid equal to five percent of the dollar amount of acquisitions the agency makes 

through the Federal Supply Schedule and the Governmentwide Acquisition Contracts.

Agencies Generally Rely 

on External Training 

Sources 
 

Page 13 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

Figure 1: Agency-reported Sources Used for Acquisition Workforce Training in 

Fiscal Year 2011

Notes: Agency training includes courses taught by agency staff or contractor personnel. 

The National Science Foundation did not respond to this question in GAO’s questionnaire.
 

Page 14 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

The Department of Transportation provided data that does not total 100 percent due to its averaging 

of the responses from its bureaus.

The Department of Justice data is an average of the responses submitted by 4 procurement offices—

headquarters and 3 bureaus.

A leading training investment practice involves agencies taking steps to 

identify the appropriate level of investment to provide for training and 

development efforts and to prioritize funding so that the most important 

training needs are addressed first.16 The four agencies we selected 

illustrate that agencies use different approaches to manage and provide 

acquisition workforce training, due to such factors as the size of their 

workforce, the need for certification training, and the resources dedicated 

to training. Three agencies—DHS, Treasury, and VA—chose to have 

permanent training facilities dedicated to providing courses to the 

acquisition workforce. These three agencies differed, however, in the 

percentage of courses they provided to meet their acquisition workforce 

needs. DHS manages its entire acquisition workforce training at the

department level and recently expanded the number of courses provided 

by the agency. However, part of DHS’s strategy is to make use of DAU 

and FAI courses that address its needs, which can be obtained at no 

additional charge. VA also manages all of its training at the department 

level and in 2008 established a training academy, the VA Acquisition 

Academy, to provide all acquisition-related courses to agency personnel 

who need it. Alternately, Treasury built its training program on an existing 

training institute within the Internal Revenue Service, which employs the 

majority of Treasury’s acquisition workforce, to provide agency courses 

available to all of its bureaus and to other agencies. Of the three 

dedicated training facilities, VA is the only one to provide agencysponsored training for 100 percent of its acquisition training courses. VA, 

DHS, and Treasury all reported using contractors to instruct the agencyprovided training at their respective facilities. Education does not have a 

dedicated facility and reported that it provides only about 10 percent of its 

acquisition workforce training via agency-sponsored courses, obtaining 

about 90 percent of needed training through external sources.

The 23 agencies reported that several factors influence the selection of 

the sources of training they use. These include the effectiveness of the 

training course, the demand for specific courses, the level of budgetary 

resources available, and the availability of specific courses to meet 

 

16GAO-12-878. 
 

Page 15 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

training needs. In their responses to our questionnaire, the agencies did 

not explain how effectiveness is determined. As we discuss later in this 

report, based on a subsequent data call we found that the agencies have 

limited insight into the effectiveness of their acquisition workforce training 

courses. Figure 2 illustrates the factors and number of agencies that 

reported them as influencing their training source selections.

Figure 2: Number of Agencies That Reported Training Source Selections Factors

Note: The 23 agencies could select more than one factor in response to our questionnaire.

Agencies’ current focus is to provide courses that allow their acquisition 

workforces to attain or maintain their FAC certification. In response to our 

questionnaire, most agencies—17 of 23—reported that they are able to 

find sufficient courses to do this. In their AHCP submission for fiscal year 

2011, most agencies (15) reported certification rates of more than 75 

percent for their contracting staff, but 3 agencies reported over 90 percent 

of their contracting staff were certified. The majority of the 23 agencies 

reported that more than 90 percent of their CORs and P/PM staff had 

obtained their basic FAC certifications—with many reaching 100 percent. 

Agency officials explained that the agency’s certification rates fluctuate 

due to changes in the workforce—including experienced staff leaving the 

agency and less experienced staff being in the process of obtaining 
 

Page 16 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

certifications. Table 3 shows the certification rates reported by agencies 

for fiscal year 2011.

Table 3: Percentage of Acquisition Workforce with Federal Acquisition Certifications by Category—Fiscal Year 2011

Contracting

Contracting Officer 

Representative

Program/Project 

Manager

Agriculture 84 100 100

Commerce 62 100 100

Education 95 100 100

Energy not reported not reported not reported

Environmental Protection Agency 80 100 91

General Services Administration 79 94 100

Health and Human Services 40 100 100

Homeland Security 86 100 94

Housing and Urban Development 76 96 29

Interior 77 91 7 a

Justice 74 89 57

Labor 80 89 100

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 84 100 100

Nuclear Regulatory Commission 76 100 100

National Science Foundation 71 100 n/a

Office of Personnel Management 95 95 100

Small Business Administration 74 100 100

Social Security Administration 76 24a 100

State 84 100 100

Transportation 91 47 58

Treasury 65 99 100

U.S. Agency for International Development 40 95 100

Veterans Affairs 77 5a 100

Source: Agencies’ Fiscal Year 2011 Acquisition Human Capital Plans.

a

In discussions, VA officials stated that the 5 percent submission for the Acquisition Human Capital 

Plan was based on an estimate of the number of CORs at that time, and the agency has since 

improved its method of counting the number of CORs. Further, VA officials stated that the variation in 

certification rates among agencies may be reflecting different definitions of the workforce. Social 

Security Administration noted it began its COR training program 2011. Interior noted it began its 

P/PMs training program in 2012.

Officials from three of the four selected agencies—DHS, Treasury, and 

VA—explained that they prioritize their training funding based on the need 

for acquisition staff to be certified. Education, where the majority of the 

acquisition workforce has attained their certifications already, reported it 
 

Page 17 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

is focusing on courses that meet staff needs to maintain certifications or 

develop expertise.

The top challenges reported by agencies in obtaining training for their 

acquisition workforces were having sufficient resources—both staffing to 

manage the training program and budgetary resources—to provide 

training. Specifically, 20 agencies reported that obtaining adequate 

funding is a challenge, and 19 reported that obtaining sufficient staff to 

manage the acquisition workforce training is a challenge. As for 

determining the appropriate level of investment, we have previously 

reported that when assessing opportunities for training, the agency 

should consider the competing demands confronting the agency, the 

limited resources available, and how these demands can best be met with 

available resources.17 Figure 3 provides a summary of the number of 

agencies that reported challenges involved in obtaining sufficient 

acquisition workforce training.

Figure 3: Challenges Reported By Agencies in Obtaining Acquisition-Specific Training Resources

Note: For “level of priority of the acquisition process in the agency,” one agency reported “don’t 

know.”

Although almost all agencies reported that obtaining an adequate level of 

funding is challenging, less than half—10 of 23—reported that their 

current acquisition training budgets are insufficient to meet their training 

needs. The acquisition workforce training budgets for fiscal year 2012 

reported by 22 of the agencies ranged from $0 to $39,598,000 for an 

 

17GAO-04-546G. 

Agencies Face Challenges 

with Having Adequate 

Training Resources, 

Identifying the Acquisition 

Workforce, and Staff 

Having Time to Attend 

Training 
 

Page 18 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

agency with its own acquisition workforce training facility. These budgets 

correspond to acquisition workforces that ranged in size from 186 to 

11,867 employees for fiscal year 2010 that handled anywhere from about 

900 to 1.4 million contracting actions with obligations ranging from $132 

million to $25 billion in fiscal year 2011.

Almost all the agencies—20 of 23—reported that they would like 

additional FAI assistance to help their acquisition workforce members 

attain federal certification by providing more course offerings or additional 

topics. In addition, to accommodate travel restrictions and budget 

constraints, some agencies would like FAI to provide more virtual courses 

for personnel that are geographically dispersed. FAI has some efforts 

underway that may somewhat address these issues, but their results are 

still uncertain as they are just beginning. FAI officials noted that while 

agencies want more offerings, FAI still has under-attended classes that 

have to be canceled. FAI officials also commented that developing on-line 

courses can also be very expensive and the cost to maintain currency of 

information is an often times overlooked cost. 

Some agencies reported challenges with a fundamental step towards 

managing the acquisition workforce—identifying the members of their 

acquisition workforce—in responding about the challenges faced with 

obtaining training for their acquisition workforce. Almost half of the 

agencies—11 of 23—reported this as challenging to some degree, 

although only 2 identified it as extremely or very challenging. In addition, 

FAI officials view identification of the acquisition workforce as the biggest 

challenge to providing training. FAI and officials at an agency that 

reported this as extremely challenging noted that some agencies are only 

beginning to train their workforce to meet certification requirements and 

may not recognize the identification of their workforce as a challenge until 

their acquisition workforce management practices become more mature. 

If members of the acquisition workforce are not identified as such, it is 

difficult to ensure their training and development needs are being met. 

Our prior work on acquisition personnel at the Department of Defense 

noted challenges with identifying the total workforce with acquisitionrelated responsibilities.18 Officials across DOD, including senior officials 

at DAU, told us that identifying some individuals with acquisition-related 

responsibilities, such as CORs, is challenging, in part because those 

 

18GAO-11-892. 
 

Page 19 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

personnel are dispersed throughout many organizations, come from a 

variety of career fields, and are often involved in acquisitions as a 

secondary and not a primary duty. The agencies’ Acquisition Career 

Managers told us that they face similar challenges in identifying CORs 

and other personnel with acquisition-related responsibilities. Three of the 

four agencies selected for further insight—DHS, Education, and VA—

acknowledged that they continue to be challenged by identifying some 

members of their acquisition workforces. 

A majority of the agencies—15 of 23—reported that they would like 

additional assistance from OFPP to improve their acquisition workforce 

training by either of two ways. Thirteen agencies supported the idea of 

OFPP creating separate job series for additional acquisition workforce 

categories, such as P/PMs. Twelve agencies supported the idea of OFPP 

maintaining a government-wide database to identify and track members. 

According to FAI and OFPP officials, they are sympathetic to agency 

concerns about identifying the total acquisition workforce. As for creating 

separate job series to more easily identify members of the acquisition 

workforce, OFPP notes that any changes would need to be made by the 

Office of Personnel Management and that some acquisition positions, 

such as CORs, may not lend themselves to becoming a unique job series 

because the work is performed as a collateral duty. As for maintaining a 

government-wide database to identify and track acquisition workforce 

members, FAI officials noted that agencies are encouraged to use the 

FAITAS registration system to track their workforce’s individual training 

records and certifications. However, registration into the system is 

currently voluntary.

Agencies also reported that their acquisition workforces are challenged in 

finding time in their workload to attend training. Most agencies—14 of 

23—considered the ability to find time as extremely or very challenging. 

Figure 4 provides a summary of the number of agencies that reported 

challenges to their staff accessing and attending acquisition-related 

training.
 

Page 20 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

Figure 4: Challenges Reported by Agencies in Staff Attending Training

Note: For “availability of budget resources for training” one agency did not respond, and for “priority 

level given to training by management” one agency reported “not applicable” and another reported 

“don’t know.”

Agencies collect some training cost data and limited information about the 

benefits of their acquisition workforce training. Based on responses to our 

questionnaire, a supplemental data request, and discussions with 

agencies’ and FAI officials, we found that many agencies do not collect 

data on the costs of training provided to their acquisition workforce that

can be used to inform agency and government-wide training resource 

investment decisions. In addition, some agencies do not have metrics to 

assess the effectiveness of their training.

In response to our questionnaire, 16 of the 23 agencies provided cost 

data associated with their acquisition workforce training programs. After 

issuing a subsequent request for available cost information, 5 more 

agencies provided data related to the costs of individual acquisition 

workforce training courses. During our review, several agencies 

contacted us for clarification on the cost data we requested, noting that 

training cost data is not readily available within their agency. We have 

previously reported that training costs can include expenses for 

instructional development; participant and instructor attendance; facility, 

material, and equipment costs; and travel and per diem expenses.19 The 

 

19GAO-12-878 and GAO-04-546G. 

Lack of Comparable 

Cost Data and Limited 

Insights On Benefits 

of Training Hinder 

Efforts to Maximize 

Resources 

Government-wide 

Government-wide Training 

Cost Data Reported Is Not 

Comparable 
 

Page 21 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

data eventually provided by the agencies included different cost 

components, which did not lend themselves to comparative analysis. For 

example, some agencies provided data on the cost per seat of specific 

courses, while others provided the total costs for delivery of each course. 

Some agencies provided the costs associated with the development of an 

in-house course, while others included development costs with delivery 

costs as a total cost of obtaining the course from a vendor. Although the 

data do not allow direct comparisons among agencies, the data show a 

range of costs for similar courses. For example, five agencies provided a 

per seat cost for a COR Refresher course, which ranged from $97 to 

$363 per seat. In addition, five agencies provided a per seat cost for a 

Cost Analysis and Negotiation Techniques course, which ranged from 

$282 to $925 per seat. However, a number of factors can produce the 

variation in the agency-reported costs and these factors, along with the 

agencies’ data collection methods, can limit the ability to make 

government-wide decisions on acquisition workforce training investments. 

According to agency officials, the costs of individual acquisition workforce 

training courses can vary greatly among agencies due to a variety of 

factors, including: the number of times per year the course is provided, 

actual attendance numbers, location of training, and whether courses are 

tailored with agency-specific information. 

FAI officials reported that they also received limited responses to their 

request for training cost data in the agencies’ latest AHCPs, which made 

it impossible for them to complete their planned comparative analyses. 

The instructions for the FAI data request did not include definitions of the 

cost components to be reported, which are important to help ensure 

consistent reporting. Due to the limited response on cost data, FAI 

initiated a subsequent data call. As of November 2012, FAI had received 

responses from 20 of the 23 agencies, but again was unable to perform a 

comparative analysis of the cost data due to various limitations in the data 

it received. FAI officials noted that collecting cost data from agencies is 

an evolving process and that having comparable training cost data is 

important to help FAI in its efforts to maximize the use of acquisition 

workforce training dollars government-wide. FAI plans to request cost 

data annually with the AHCPs; however, the guidance for completing the 

next submission does not include definitions of the cost data to be 

reported, which may again yield data that cannot be compared across 

agencies. Improved reporting of cost data could assist FAI as it moves 

forward with its plans to award government-wide contracts for acquisition 

workforce training in 2014 by allowing FAI to obtain insight into the 

agencies’ training costs when obtaining training from a variety of external 

sources.
 

Page 22 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

About half of the agencies—12 of 23—did not have insight into whether 

their acquisition workforce training investment is improving individual 

skills or agency performance. In particular, in response to our 

questionnaire and subsequent data request 7 of 23 agencies reported 

having no metrics to monitor or assess the effectiveness of their 

acquisition workforce training efforts, a measure of whether the training 

investment is improving individual skills or agency performance. Five 

agencies did not provide information to support use of metrics to measure 

the training benefits, either improving individual skills or agency 

performance, of acquisition training in response to our supplemental data 

request. 

We have previously reported that training programs can be assessed by 

measuring (1) participant reaction to the training program, (2) changes in 

employee behavior or performance, and (3) the impact of the training on 

program or organizational results, which may include a return on 

investment assessment that compares training costs to derived benefits.20

Of the 11 agencies that provided information to support their use of 

metrics, 3 reported using end-of-course evaluations to measure 

participants’ reaction, one reported using end-of-course tests to measure 

changes in employees’ knowledge, and one reported using post-course 

surveys to supervisors or participants to measure if what was learned 

affected the participants’ behavior. The other 6 agencies reported 

measures aimed at determining the impact of training on the agency’s 

mission. Furthermore, DHS officials said that they plan to begin using 

post-course surveys of participants and supervisors in fiscal year 2013, 

and they are pursuing the development of additional measures to 

evaluate the impact of training on the agency. VA is also pursuing the 

development of additional metrics, such as proxy measures for return on 

investment, to evaluate the impact of training on the agency. Participant 

evaluations offer limited insight into improvements in individual and 

agency performance; however, we recognize that higher levels of 

evaluation (such as evaluating the impact on organizational performance 

or comparing training costs to derived benefits) can be challenging to 

 

20Training program measures are generally associated with the Kirkpatrick model of 

evaluation, a popular model of evaluation, that includes measuring (1) participant reaction 

to the training program; (2) changes in employee skills, knowledge, or abilities; (3) 

changes in employee behavior or performance; and (4) the impact of the training on 

program or organizational results, which may be split into a fifth level that includes a return 

on investment assessment that compares training costs to derived benefits. See 

GAO-12-878. 

Agencies Gather Limited 

Information on Benefits of 

Acquisition Workforce 

Training Investment
 

Page 23 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

conduct because of the difficulty and costs associated with data collection 

and the complexity in directly linking training and development programs 

to improved individual and organizational performance.21

Officials at some of the selected agencies told us that when the course is 

provided by an external source, such as FAI or DAU, they rely on the 

external source to provide end-of-course evaluations to the participants. 

As we noted earlier, 17 of 23 agencies obtain the majority of their 

acquisition training from external sources. In particular, some agencies 

noted that they do not collect or assess the end-of-course evaluations, 

relying solely on the external source to use the evaluations as they 

believe appropriate. FAI officials noted that if the agencies do not review 

the evaluations themselves, they are missing the opportunity to ensure 

that the courses are effective in training their acquisition personnel. We 

have previously reported that it is increasingly important for agencies to 

be able to evaluate their training programs and demonstrate how these 

efforts help develop employees and improve the agencies’ performance 

because it can aid decision makers in managing scarce resources and 

provide credible information on how training has affected individual and 

organizational performance.22 Although FAI has an initiative underway to 

standardize the evaluations provided for its courses, its impact may be 

limited if agencies do not obtain the evaluation results and use them to 

evaluate the effectiveness of the training.

Given the large acquisition investments the federal government makes 

each year, it is essential that the people in agencies who manage these 

procurements day-to-day—the acquisition workforce—be well-trained to 

handle their responsibilities. Fundamentally, agencies need key 

information to manage and oversee their acquisition workforce training 

investments. For example, agencies need to identify their acquisition 

workforce members, and measure how the training benefits the agencies 

by providing the workforce with the knowledge and skills to do their jobs 

effectively. At this point, OFPP, FAI, and federal agencies are taking 

steps that may potentially improve the effectiveness and efficiency of their 

training programs, but a number of challenges and limitations need to be 

overcome. Although FAI has various efforts underway—such as its efforts 

 

21GAO-12-878. 

22GAO-12-878 and GAO-04-546G. 

Conclusions 
 

Page 24 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

to ensure that every training seat is filled—to assist agencies in meeting 

OFPP requirements and leveraging federal government training 

resources, these efforts face significant obstacles. Agencies, FAI, and 

OFPP lack data on the acquisition workforce itself and the benefits of 

training, as well as cost data that can be used to make comparisons. 

These limitations hinder government-wide efforts to share information 

during these times of constrained budgets. OFPP, FAI, and the agencies 

need basic information on how much agencies are spending to train the 

acquisition workforce. Providing definitions and guidance about the 

elements of costs agencies should include in their annual acquisition 

human capital plans will help OFPP and FAI in their efforts to collect 

comparable data across agencies. FAI can then analyze and share 

information to help agencies make choices regarding how best to 

dedicate resources to effectively train the acquisition workforce. 

Additionally, comparable costs data will be helpful to inform FAI efforts to 

award government-wide contracts for standard acquisition workforce 

certification training.

Currently, the main focus of monitoring and tracking acquisition workforce 

training efforts in agencies is on completion of training to attain and 

maintain the FAC certifications. Although the higher levels of evaluation 

(such as evaluating the impact on organizational performance or 

comparing training costs to derived benefits) can be challenging to 

conduct due to costs and complexity, agencies should, at a minimum, 

evaluate participant reaction to the training program through end of 

course evaluations. However, this is a basic measure that some agencies 

are lacking because the evaluations currently being administered go to 

the provider of the class and not the agency paying for the training. 

Therefore, these agencies have little insight into how the workforce 

perceives the training they received. We note that FAI has initiatives 

underway to standardize the course evaluations for the courses it 

provides and to make completion of the course evaluations mandatory to 

receive course credit. At present, this effort only applies to FAI-sponsored 

courses and will not include agencies that use other vendors, and does 

not guarantee that agencies will analyze the results; it is important for all 

agencies to collect and analyze this basic information.

To help ensure that agencies collect and report comparable cost data and 

perform a minimal assessment of the benefits of their acquisition training 

investments to aid in the coordination and evaluation of the use of 

resources government-wide, we recommend the Director of the Office of 

Management and Budget direct the Administrator of the Office of Federal 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action
 

Page 25 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

Procurement Policy, in consultation with the Director of the Federal 

Acquisition Institute, to take the following two actions:

• provide further guidance, including definitions, on the types of costs 

that agencies should include in their Acquisition Human Capital Plan 

submission to help determine total training investment; and

• require all agencies, at a minimum, to collect and analyze participant 

evaluations of all acquisition workforce training as a first step to help 

assess the effectiveness of their training investment. 

We provided a draft of this report to OFPP, FAI, and the selected 

agencies—DHS, Education, Treasury, and VA. OFPP and FAI concurred 

with our recommendations in oral comments and e-mail responses. 

Education and Treasury responded via e-mail with no comments. DHS 

and VA provided technical comments, which we incorporated as 

appropriate.

In oral comments, OFPP and FAI agreed with our recommendations and 

noted that they have begun drafting guidance to federal agencies. 

Consistent with our report, OFPP and FAI emphasized the importance of 

acquisition workforce management tools that improve the government’s 

ability to leverage acquisition resources especially during this time of 

budgetary constraints. These officials highlighted FAITAS, which can 

serve as a workforce management tool and training application system. 

Currently, use of this system is voluntary and some agencies use the 

system to enroll participants in FAI courses, communicate available 

training seats within a specific agency’s training course, and track their 

workforce’s individual training records and certifications. Recognizing the 

potential benefits of this system in helping to coordinate and evaluate the 

use of training resources government-wide, OFPP stated that it is 

considering making FAITAS reporting mandatory for civilian agencies. 

As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly announce the contents of 

this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the 

report date. At that time, we will send copies of this report to the 

Administrator of OFPP, the Director of FAI, and the Secretaries of DHS, 

Education, Treasury, and VA. In addition, the report will be available at no 

charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact 

me at (202) 512-4841 or MartinB@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices 

of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last 

Agency Comments

and Our Evaluation
 

Page 26 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this report 

are listed in appendix III.

Belva M. Martin 

Director, Acquisition and Sourcing Management
 

Page 27 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

List of Requesters

The Honorable Thomas Carper

Chairman

The Honorable Tom Coburn

Ranking Member

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

United States Senate

The Honorable Darrell Issa

Chairman

The Honorable Elijah Cummings

Ranking Member

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

United States House of Representatives

The Honorable Claire McCaskill

Chairman

Subcommittee on Financial and Contracting Oversight

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

United States Senate

The Honorable Susan Collins

United States Senate
Appendix I: Summary of Agencies’ Response 

to GAO Questionnaire on Civilian Acquisition 

Workforce Training

Page 28 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

In July 2012, GAO administered a government-wide survey of the 23 civilian CFO 

Act agencies designed to gather information regarding the training approach and 

methods, staffing and budgetary resources, and costs associated with providing 

acquisition training—including the operation of facilities dedicated to training the 

acquisition workforce. We received responses from 100 percent of the agencies, 

although not every agency responded to each question. A summary of the number of 

agencies’ who responded to each question is provided below. We removed the 

open-ended narrative responses, but included the ranges of open-ended data. 

Details of our survey methodology are provided in appendix II.

Appendix I: Summary of Agencies’ Response 

to GAO Questionnaire on Civilian Acquisition 

Workforce Training
Appendix I: Summary of Agencies’ Response 

to GAO Questionnaire on Civilian Acquisition 

Workforce Training

Page 29 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix I: Summary of Agencies’ Response 

to GAO Questionnaire on Civilian Acquisition 

Workforce Training

Page 30 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix I: Summary of Agencies’ Response 

to GAO Questionnaire on Civilian Acquisition 

Workforce Training

Page 31 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix I: Summary of Agencies’ Response 

to GAO Questionnaire on Civilian Acquisition 

Workforce Training

Page 32 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix I: Summary of Agencies’ Response 

to GAO Questionnaire on Civilian Acquisition 

Workforce Training

Page 33 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix I: Summary of Agencies’ Response 

to GAO Questionnaire on Civilian Acquisition

Workforce Training

Page 34 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix I: Summary of Agencies’ Response 

to GAO Questionnaire on Civilian Acquisition 

Workforce Training

Page 35 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix I: Summary of Agencies’ Response 

to GAO Questionnaire on Civilian Acquisition 

Workforce Training

Page 36 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix I: Summary of Agencies’ Response 

to GAO Questionnaire on Civilian Acquisition 

Workforce Training

Page 37 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix I: Summary of Agencies’ Response 

to GAO Questionnaire on Civilian Acquisition 

Workforce Training

Page 38 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix I: Summary of Agencies’ Response 

to GAO Questionnaire on Civilian Acquisition 

Workforce Training

Page 39 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix I: Summary of Agencies’ Response 

to GAO Questionnaire on Civilian Acquisition 

Workforce Training

Page 40 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix I: Summary of Agencies’ Response 

to GAO Questionnaire on Civilian Acquisition 

Workforce Training

Page 41 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix I: Summary of Agencies’ Response 

to GAO Questionnaire on Civilian Acquisition 

Workforce Training

Page 42 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce
Appendix II: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 43 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

The objectives of this review were to evaluate the training approaches of 

federal agencies, other than the Department of Defense, for the 

acquisition workforce. Specifically, this report addresses the (1) role of the 

Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) and the Federal Acquisition 

Institute (FAI) in promoting Federal Acquisition Certification (FAC) 

standards and assisting agencies in meeting acquisition workforce 

training requirements; (2) approaches agencies use to provide training to 

their acquisition workforces; and (3) the extent to which agencies track 

information on the costs and benefits of their acquisition training.

To identify the roles of OFPP and FAI in promoting FAC standards, we 

analyzed legislation on their authority, the OFPP acquisition workforce 

strategic plan, and relevant guidance provided by them to agencies. We 

interviewed officials at OFPP and FAI about efforts to (1) provide 

oversight and assist agencies in meeting training requirements; (2) 

leverage government-wide resources; and (3) share leading practices. 

Since FAI’s initiatives are in various stages of implementation, we did not 

evaluate their effectiveness; however, in several instances, we note our 

initial observations of the efforts. 

To obtain government-wide information on how agencies provide training 

to their acquisition workforce, we administered a questionnaire with both 

open and close-ended questions to 23 Chief Financial Officers Act 

agencies.1 These agencies are: the Departments of Agriculture, 

Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland 

Security, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, Justice, Labor, 

State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the 

Environmental Protection Agency; General Services Administration; 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration; Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission; National Science Foundation; Office of Personnel 

Management; Small Business Administration; Social Security 

Administration; and the U.S. Agency for International Development.2 We 

 

1 31 U.S.C. § 901.

2 The Department of Defense is excluded from this review because we have previously 

reported on its acquisition workforce training and it follows separate acquisition workforce 

certification standards specified the Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act, 

Pub. L. No. 101-510, § 1202(a) (1990). See GAO, Defense Acquisition Workforce: Better 

Identification, Development, and Oversight Needed for Personnel Involved in Acquiring 

Services, GAO-11-892 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 28, 2011) and Defense Acquisition 

Workforce: DOD’s Training Program Demonstrates Many Attributes of Effectiveness, but 

Improvement Is Needed, GAO-11-22 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 28, 2010). 

Appendix II: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 
Appendix II: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 44 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

used a standard set of questions to obtain data about their training

approaches, including the sources for course offerings (in particular 

whether courses were provided by the agency, a commercial sector 

vendor, FAI, the Defense Acquisition University, or another agency), 

facilities, budgetary and staffing resources, methods of training, and 

challenges faced in providing acquisition training. Because this was not a 

sample survey, it has no sampling errors. However, the practical 

difficulties of conducting any survey may introduce errors, commonly 

referred to as nonsampling errors. For example, difficulties in interpreting 

a particular question, sources of information available to respondents, or 

entering data into a database or analyzing them can introduce unwanted 

variability into the survey results. We took steps in developing the 

questionnaire, collecting the data, and analyzing them to minimize such 

nonsampling error. After we drafted the questionnaire, we asked for 

comments from federal officials knowledgeable about acquisition 

workforce and training issues and from independent GAO survey 

professionals. We conducted pretests to check that (1) the questions 

were clear and unambiguous, (2) terminology was used correctly, (3) the 

questionnaire did not place an undue burden on agency officials, (4) the 

information could feasibly be obtained, and (5) the survey was 

comprehensive and unbiased. We chose the two pretest sites to include 

perspectives from agencies with robust acquisition workforce training 

programs and training facilities. We made changes to the content and 

format of the questionnaire after both reviews and after each of the 

pretests, based on the feedback we received. We sent the questionnaire 

by e-mail in an attached Microsoft Word form that respondents could 

return electronically after marking checkboxes or entering responses into 

open answer boxes on July 5, 2012. We sent the questionnaire jointly to 

the Chief Acquisition Officer, Acquisition Career Manager, and Chief 

Learning Officer of each agency, asking for a consolidated agency 

response. After two weeks, we sent a reminder to everyone who had not 

responded. All questionnaires were returned by August 10, 2012. We 

received questionnaire responses from 100 percent of the agencies, 

although not all agencies answered every question. The Department of 

Justice provided four responses—one from its headquarters procurement 

office and three from bureau procurement offices. We consolidated the 

information from the four surveys to ensure the tabulations eliminated 

duplicative counting of the agency and to provide averaged data, as 

appropriate. In questions regarding the agency’s opinions regarding 

challenges faced, we deferred to the response of the headquarters 

procurement office.
Appendix II: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 45 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

To confirm our understanding of the variety of issues addressed and 

obtain additional insights on the agencies’ responses to our 

questionnaire, we discussed our preliminary results with representatives 

from the 23 agencies at meetings of the Chief Acquisition Officers 

Council, Interagency Acquisition Career Management Committee, and the 

Chief Learning Officers Council. Table 4 provides a summary of the 

functions of these councils as related to government-wide efforts for 

training the acquisition workforce. 

Table 4: Interagency Councils Involved in Oversight and Management of Acquisition Workforce Training

Council Main Purpose Training-related responsibilities

Chief Acquisition Officers 

Council (CAOC)

Serves as the principal 

interagency forum for 

monitoring and improving the 

federal acquisition system

Develops recommendations for the Director of the 

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on 

acquisition policies and requirements

Shares experiences, ideas, best practices, and 

innovative approaches

Works with the Office of Personnel Management to

assess and address acquisition training needs of the 

government.

OFPP, OMB, and DOD are represented on the council 

along with the Chief Acquisition Officers, including 

those from each of the 23 civilian CFO Act agencies

Interagency Acquisition 

Career Management 

Committee (IACMC)

Supports the implementation of 

interagency plans and programs 

for improving and maintaining 

the competence of federal 

acquisition personnel—as such, 

it supports OFPP and FAI in 

workforce program 

implementation

Identifies civilian agency training needs and assists FAI 

in developing the training delivery strategy for courses 

funded by the Acquisition Workforce Training Fund

Communicates agency acquisition workforce training 

needs and priorities to FAI for core training, just-in-time 

classes, electives, and other classes

Coordinates the development and implementation of 

acquisition career management plans and programs—

including the Federal Acquisition Certification (FAC) 

programs

Facilitates the exchange of information on agency 

acquisition career management programs covering 

personnel management 

Assists FAI in (1) developing recommendations for new 

initiatives and alternate methods of training delivery; (2) 

making subject matter specialists available to review 

and evaluate course material and participate in pilot 

courses; (3) ensuring that training meets civilian 

agencies' needs; and (4) ensuring that civilian agencies 

participate in decisions affecting long-range curriculum 

development
Appendix II: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 46 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

Council Main Purpose Training-related responsibilities

Chief Learning Officers 

Council (CLOC)

Community of practice 

composed of federal Chief

Learning Officers (CLO) or their 

equivalents formed to act

collectively to support and 

further learning and training 

efforts across the government

Shares agencies’ best practices and creates learning 

opportunities for agencies and organizations

Officials who hold positions similar to a CLO in 

independent agencies, boards, commissions, and the 

intelligence community are also members

Source: GAO summary of council information. 

We also reviewed the agencies’ annual Acquisition Human Capital Plans 

(AHCP) due March 31, 2012, to collect information on certification rates, 

and corroborate information agencies provided in response to the 

questionnaire on acquisition workforce size and training approaches.

To determine the information agencies track on the costs and benefits of 

the training provided, we supplemented the questionnaire responses by 

soliciting additional cost and metrics data from the agencies using a data 

collection instrument. We developed our data collection instrument based 

on cost information provided from agencies in response to our 

questionnaire. We sent agency-tailored data collection instruments by email in an attached Microsoft Excel spreadsheet that respondents could 

return electronically after updating or providing new data on October 15, 

2012. We pre-populated each agency’s spreadsheet with any data 

previously provided by the agency, and sent the data collection 

instrument to the Acquisition Career Manager and the official who 

provided the response to the questionnaire. After two weeks, we sent a 

reminder to everyone who had not responded. The data collection 

instruments were returned by November 28, 2012. We received data 

collection instruments from 91 percent of the agencies.

To gather illustrative examples and more detailed explanations regarding 

training approaches and data tracked related to costs and benefits, we 

selected four agencies—the Departments of Education (Education), 

Homeland Security (DHS), the Treasury (Treasury), and Veterans Affairs 

(VA)—for further review. DHS, Treasury, and VA are agencies that 

operate dedicated acquisition workforce training facilities—permanent 

centers with dedicated resources that provide training specifically for the 

agency’s acquisition workforce. Education, which is one of the smallest 

agencies, has no dedicated facility and has reported issues with access 

to acquisition workforce training courses. We interviewed agency officials 

to determine the extent to which they were aware of and using the leading 

training investment practices that the Office of Personnel Management 

and experts agreed should be implemented by agencies to support 
Appendix II: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 47 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

effective training investment decisions.3 Table 5 provides a summary of 

these leading practices.

Table 5: Leading Training Investment Practices Agencies Should Implement

Practice 1: (a) Identify the appropriate level of investment to provide for training and development efforts and (b) 

prioritize funding so that the most important training needs are addressed first.

Practice 2: Identify the most appropriate mix of centralized and decentralized approaches for its training and 

development programs.

Practice 3: Consider government-wide reports and other targeted initiatives to improve management and 

performance when planning its training and development programs.

Practice 4: Have criteria for determining whether to design training and development programs in-house or obtain 

these services from a contractor or other external source.

Practice 5: Compare the merits of difference delivery mechanisms (such as classroom or computer-based training) 

and determine what mix of mechanisms to use to ensure efficient and cost-effective delivery.

Practice 6: Track the cost and delivery of its training and development programs agency-wide.

Practice 7: Evaluate the benefits achieved through training and development programs, including improvements in 

individual and agency performance:

(a) Has a formal process for evaluating employee satisfaction with training.

(b) Has a formal process for evaluating improvement in employee performance after training.

(c) Has a formal process for evaluating the impact of training on the agency’s performance goals and 

mission.

Practice 8: Compare training investments, methods, or outcomes with those of other organizations to identify 

innovative approaches or lessons learned.

Source: GAO, GAO-12-878. 

Of the eight leading practices GAO identified, we focused on the four 

practices dealing primarily with determining costs and effectiveness of 

training: (practice 1) identifying the appropriate level of investment to 

provide for training and development efforts and prioritize funding so that 

the most important training needs are addressed first; (practice 4) having 

criteria for determining whether to design training and development 

programs in-house or obtain these services from a contractor or other 

external source; (practice 6) tracking the cost and delivery of its training 

and development programs agency-wide; and (practice 7) evaluating the 

benefits achieved through training and development programs, including 

improvements in individual and agency performance.

 

3

GAO-12-878
Appendix II: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology

Page 48 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

We conducted this performance audit from February 2012 to March 2013, 

in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives. 
Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgements

Page 49 GAO-13-231 Acquisition Workforce

Belva M. Martin, (202) 512-4841 or MartinB@gao.gov 

In addition to the contact name above, Penny Berrier (Assistant Director); 

R. Eli DeVan; Mya Dinh; Jean McSween; Aku Pappoe; Kenneth Patton; 

Carol D. Petersen; Sylvia Schatz; and Suzanne Sterling made key 

contributions to this report.

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgements 

GAO Contact

Staff 

Acknowledgements 

(121046)
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. 

GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday 

afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, 

and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted 

products, go to http://www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts. 

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov. 

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.